Re[6]: [PEAR-DEV] previos message

Hello Martin, Sunday, September 16, 2001, 2:29:46 AM, you wrote: MJ> On Sun, 16 Sep 2001 02:12:21 +0400, Denis Peplin wrote: >>MJ> On Sun, 16 Sep 2001 01:11:45 +0400, Denis Peplin wrote: >> >>>>Saturday, September 15, 2001, 12:45:00 PM, you wrote: >>>> >>>>MJ> On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 22:54:30 +0400, Denis Peplin wrote: >>>> >>>>MJ> It was about the Image class, right? >>>>Yes, right. >>>> >>>>MJ> I think the code looks promising >>>>MJ> and it might be interesting for lots of users, but you should make it >>>>MJ> pass all your test before committing it into PEAR. >>>>Ok, I will do it in one day. >>>>But I have two questions: what name and what file name will be best >>>>for this class? >> >>MJ> Image_Common is OK. The place for it in PEAR >>MJ> should be /pear/Image_Common/Common.php then. >> >>Why not /pear/Image/Common.php? MJ> Ahh, I should really commit the 'documentation' stuff ;-). MJ> PEAR has to scale in terms of the number of developers, so for MJ> practical reasons we organize the "pear" CVS module into MJ> sub-projects (packages). Each package has its own development MJ> team, release cycle and also its own directory under "pear". MJ> To take your example, a "Image" package would probably become MJ> very big and hard to maintain. So if nobody has enough interest MJ> in everything image-related to maintain a single package for MJ> "Image", smaller packages such as Image_Foo and Image_Bar MJ> start showing up. Thank you for this description. Where can I find more detailed documentation? MJ> According to this rule I don't know anymore if Image_Common MJ> is an appropriate name for it. Perhaps Image_GDConvert would MJ> be better since converting images (that's the purpose of your MJ> class, isn't it?) isn't what I would call common image operations. From my point of view, "common image operations" is: 1) read image from database or file to binary string, 2) perform some operations, and 3) print it to browser or file Image_Common will help in 1 and 3 in additional, it will help store image into database, possible in different formats (we can't store resources directly, right?) It can be some more examples of usage. And I think, Image_Common look better than Image_GDConvert (Maybe, Image:: look more better, but i'm absolutely don't sure about this) -- Best regards, Denis mailto:info@volginfo.ru